Increased Usability in Planner Selection

[fwollatz]

User Story

As a new Developer, who is experimenting, I want to figure out which planner (tamer, pyperplane, etc.) is best for me, and which features of my problem could be removed to find a working planner.

But with many engines, it becomes quite hard to follow, which ones are nearly working, and which ones are not at all.

Therefore I suggest a few changes in the following screen (I made the True and False-Values up, just wanted to give a comprehensive example. My own table is 16x9 Cells, that's where this comes in handy.):

Engine	FINAL_VALUE	NUMERIC_FLUENTS	CONTINUOUS_TIME	ACTION_BASED
fast-downward	False	False	False	True
fast-downward-opt	False	False	True	True
pyperplan	True	True	False	True

I suggest a column, that shows how many of the existing Features, the planner has to offer and a highlight of the fitting falses in rows, with at least 70% fit. Don't do it for all, because, that might be too cluttery. Do the same with the highest fit values.:

Engine	FINAL_VALUE	NUMERIC_FLUENTS	CONTINUOUS_TIME	ACTION_BASED	FIT
fast-downward	False	False	False	True	1/4
fast-downward-opt	False	False	True	True	2/4
pyperplan	True	True	False	True	3/4

You could also have one lookup file for all the integrated Engines in your Documentation (sorry if I overlooked that).

Acceptance Criteria

• Show Amount of fitting criteria
• Highlight the rare Falses (maybe with color) and the highest fit-values.
• Have a Lookup table about features of engines in your Documentation

Attention Points

• Rich Formating might help with the colored formatting.